The New Xeon E7v3: The Same Xeon Haswell-EP Die...

The "new" Xeon E7 is basically the same Haswell EP die that we talked about in the our Xeon E5 reviews. Spot the only difference between the Haswell EP, 

and the Haswell EX die: 

Indeed, a third QPI link which allows an 8-socket configuration without any special glue logic. The transistor count is the same (5.69 Billion) and that is also true for the massive die size (662 mm²).

Introduction Xeon E7 v3 System and Memory Architecture
POST A COMMENT

146 Comments

View All Comments

  • PowerTrumps - Saturday, May 9, 2015 - link

    I'm sure the author will update the article unless this was a Intel cheerleading piece. Reply
  • name99 - Friday, May 8, 2015 - link

    The thing is called E7-8890. Not E7-5890?
    WTF Intel? Is your marketing team populated by utter idiots? Exactly what value is there in not following the same damn numbering scheme that your product line has followed for the past eight years or so?

    Something like that makes the chip look like there's a whole lot of "but this one goes up to 11" thinking going on at Intel...
    Reply
  • name99 - Friday, May 8, 2015 - link

    OK, I get it. The first number indicates the number of glueless chips, not the micro-architecture generation. Instead we do that (apparently) with a v2 or v3 suffix.
    I still claim this is totally idiotic. Far more sensible would be to use the same scheme as the other Intel processors, and use a suffix like S2, S4, S8 to show the glueless SMP capabilities.
    Reply
  • ZeDestructor - Friday, May 8, 2015 - link

    They've been using this convention since Westmere-EX actually, at which point they ditched their old convention of a prefix letter for power tier, followed by one digit for performance/scalability tier, followed by another digit for generation then the rest for individual models. Now we have 2xxx for dual socket, 4xxx for quad socket and 8xxx for 8+ sockets, and E3/E5/E7 for the scalability tier. I'm fine with either, though I have a slight preference for the current naming scheme because the generation is no longer mixed into the main model number. Reply
  • Morawka - Saturday, May 9, 2015 - link

    man the power 8 is a beefy cpu... all that cache, you'd think it would walk all over intel.. but intel's superior cpu design wins Reply
  • PowerTrumps - Saturday, May 9, 2015 - link

    please explain Reply
  • tsk2k - Saturday, May 9, 2015 - link

    Where are the gaming benchmarks? Reply
  • JohanAnandtech - Saturday, May 9, 2015 - link

    Is there still a game with software rendering? :-) Reply
  • Gigaplex - Sunday, May 10, 2015 - link

    Llvmpipe on Linux gives a capable (feature wise) OpenGL implementation on the CPU. Reply
  • Klimax - Saturday, May 9, 2015 - link

    Don't see POWER getting anywhere with that kind of TDP. There will be dearth of datacenters and other hosting locations retooling for such thing. And I suspect not many will even then take it as cooling and power costs will be damn too high.

    Problem is, IBM can't go lower with TDP as architecture features enabling such performance are directly responsible for such TDP. (Just L1 consumes 2W to keep few cycles latency at high frequency)
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now